[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Interesting answers, but not to the question I was asking, or meaning to ask. I didn't make it clear enough in my first try, and that is my fault. I wasn't asking whether it was possible that you could be mistaken about being *permanently* enlightened, I was asking whether it was possible that you could be mistaken about being enlight- ened, period. Are you willing to stand on Nope? So if I defined enlightenment and you agreed with most of the definition... No, I *agreed* with very little of the definition. I agreed that it was *your* definition. ...and I said I based the definition on my experience and you ask me if I could be mistaken about my experience (of enlightenment), then doesn't life turn into one big infinte regress, and as a result nothing means anything? Duh. *Of course* you could be mistaken about your experience. You dodged the question about the test. Did you see the moonwalking bear the first time you took it? If you didn't, then you were mistaken about your experience. (If you didn't and claim that you did, you were not only mistaken about your experience, but willing to lie about being mistaken.) What I see you doing is 1) defining enlightenment as What I experience, and 2) asserting that you cannot possibly be mistaken about the nature of that experience. So here are the next questions (I'm running out of posts for the week, so I have to get them in as I can): 3. Can an enlightened being, as you have defined one using yourself as the definition, be mistaken about ANYTHING? 4. If someone who is enlightened as you have defined enlightened speaks or writes, can what that person says be assumed to be correct? In other words, are the enlightened always right when they say something? Before I answer these next two questions, I must know what your definition of enlightenment is. Is it based on passing the test of the moonwalking bear? Yes, or no? You *must* know? You do not have the right to must anything, dude. But since you want to play games instead of continue your Intro Lecture and sales pitch, I'll play along a little. I don't actually have a fixed definition of enlight- enment, but if it did, it would have little to do with yours. ALL of the things you mentioned were completely subjective; NONE of them mentioned other people and your relationship to them (other than your claim that you create them.) If I had to analyze your definitions so far, I would have to say that I stand by my earlier assessment of your state of consciousness -- 10% real experience, 95% moodmaking, and 95% New Age bullshit. Most of them were BELIEFS, which have been presented to you system- atically over the years by the TMO; you could easily be moodmaking ANY and ALL of them. NONE of the criteria you spoke of was in the least objective, and NOTHING you mentioned *does a damned thing to help anyone else in the world*. My definitions of enlightenment center around the relationship one has with other sentient beings. That is objective and verifiable, and has the potential to actually help other people. That never even entered your calculations. You had said that you cannot provide a defintion of enlightenment, and yet you disagree with my definition, so you must have something in mind in order to disagree. What is it that you have in mind for a definition of enlightenment? Once you answer my questions, we can proceed. Covered above. I was willing to just let you talk about what makes you believe you are enlightened, and not comment, but you seem to be forcing the issue of comment. Well, so far I am not impressed. Your definitions of enlight- enment are similar to your taste in entertainment -- you prefer the comic book version. You presented absolutely NOTHING that had not been told to you many times before, by TMers and by the pop culture, comic book ideas about enlightenment. And you presented absolutely NOTHING that could possibly be of any value to anyone except yourself. Hell, you implied that anyone else does not even EXIST; you create them. If this is your idea of how to market the idea that I or anyone else should strive to attain the state that you claim, much less permanently, you're not doing a very good job of it so far. What you are describing IMO is solipsism, not enlightenment. If you would like to EXPAND your definitions to suggest any value that your brand of enlightenment has for anyone else, then feel free to do so. But at this point I am content with your earlier defin- itions; they are exactly what I was expecting. Now I'm more
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip You *must* know? You do not have the right to must anything, dude. But since you want to play games instead of continue your Intro Lecture and sales pitch, I'll play along a little. snip I think we are done. You misrepresented yourself as asking questions initially as a student, and now you mock me and disrespect me. I do not want any kind of student teacher relationship with anyone, but thought perhaps it was one way to have a mutually respectful and insightful conversation with you. Best of luck to you.
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ---(below - in my view). No. By all means, attain the Self, the non- dual state described by the Neo-Advaitins; but don't regard that as the ultimate goal, or even being close to Enlightenment, unless one has made the progression through the Kundalini signs. The Neo- Advaitins haven't done this. snip Experientially, in other words, in terms of inner freedom experienced in real life, (in other words, outside your head) there is little difference between living a non-dual state and accomplishing the signs that you speak of. Once the mind is free of encumbrances, there is little that the freedom of the body can add to the experience. This insistence of yours on attaining signs is just a way to keep the dissolution of your identity at bay. In other words, you remain bound to subtle elements of your ego, by insisting to yourself that true enlightenment has nothing to do with living a non-dual reality.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
On May 28, 2008, at 11:37 PM, bob_brigante wrote: India is a country mired in poverty, violence, and unhappiness because the people have muddled ideas about how to meditate, which is more than picking a mantra off a shelf. It was the mission of Guru Dev and MMY to restore the centerpiece of Vedic knowledge -- the knowledge of TM -- to its authentic and effective practice. They did so, and the results of that mission will be soon clear enough even to people whose failure to practice an effective meditation technique renders them unable to evaluate the situation. But TM is Tantric not Vedic Bob. It sounded nice though. I almost checked my hands for flaked off gold gilding!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
On May 29, 2008, at 12:53 AM, yifuxero wrote: ---(below - in my view). No. By all means, attain the Self, the non- dual state described by the Neo-Advaitins; but don't regard that as the ultimate goal, or even being close to Enlightenment, unless one has made the progression through the Kundalini signs. The Neo-Advaitins haven't done this. Very good point yifuxero! Apart from regular Sadhana, the when of Neo-Advaitic permanent realization (and Enlightement - which lies beyond the ordinary Neo- Advaitic state) is largely out of our hands and is dependent on the status of our karma and the physical structures we came into the world with; apart from our regular Sadhana. Obviously, many people will not get Enlightened during the present lifetime. Oh come on! At least we can pretend! ;-) After all, if you run it over and over in your head every day, for decade after decade, when you finally begin to have some small signs of ripening, why can't you just assume you're enlightened? :-) So instead of placing one's entire basket of marbles into the Enlightenement goal, I recommend the following: a. Simply continue with one's regular Sadhana (I'm a TM TB btw); but set one's goals on a much easier task: b. Strive to surely but gradually INCREASE ONE'S SHAKTI LEVEL. This is a rather easy goal that can bear concrete results in a short period of time, say a few months. The means of doing this have been briefly mentioned in previous posts. c. Now we get to the result of this more reasonable and more easily attainable goal: First, we hasten our progress toward Enlightenment; but in the short run (like a couple of weeks from now...) we can USE the Shakti in our daily lives for whatever purposes we desire. Obviously, there are practical limitations to the fulfillment of desires, but whatever they are, more SHAKTI POWER will be of great help. Personally, I believe that MMY's whole worldview pertaining to the progression of states of consciousness: TC,...leading to Unity; actually contributes to mental breakdowns; Interesting idea, as so many people get SO attached to that model, they actually believe it and then hyper-vigilantly watch for it. But at the end of the day, it's just a model. It has no inherent substance.
[FairfieldLife] Why do Buddhists attack?
Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals, but do not approach any study or unpublished study on Buddhist meditation with the same vigor? Does anyone have an explanation for this phenomenon among Buddhists? OffWorld
Re: [FairfieldLife] Why do Buddhists attack?
On May 29, 2008, at 7:13 AM, off_world_beings wrote: Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals, but do not approach any study or unpublished study on Buddhist meditation with the same vigor? Of course, this isn't what's happening. To merely point out the truth behind often terribly biased, poor methodology or simply greatly exaggerated claims is just pointing out the obvious. To TB's who actually believed it, it comes as a shock or even a heresy. But such are the pseudo-science cults. Early Buddhist research was marginally interesting, but gradually improved beyond pilot studies into some groundbreaking research. And that continues. Mindfulness research is actually growing at a logarithmic rate accord to Jon Kabat-Zinn. Because the findings were so convincing you now have Buddhist meditation taught at hospitals all over the US and it's spreading like wild fire in Britain and other places.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why do Buddhists attack?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 29, 2008, at 7:13 AM, off_world_beings wrote: Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals, but do not approach any study or unpublished study on Buddhist meditation with the same vigor? Of course, this isn't what's happening. To merely point out the truth behind often terribly biased, poor methodology or simply greatly exaggerated claims is just pointing out the obvious. To TB's who actually believed it, it comes as a shock or even a heresy. But such are the pseudo-science cults. Early Buddhist research was marginally interesting, but gradually improved beyond pilot studies into some groundbreaking research. And that continues. Mindfulness research is actually growing at a logarithmic rate accord to Jon Kabat-Zinn. Because the findings were so convincing you now have Buddhist meditation taught at hospitals all over the US and it's spreading like wild fire in Britain and other places. Its interesting that he now is making things up, with no evidence to back up these statements. Why does the Buddhist attack, and make things up? OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip You *must* know? You do not have the right to must anything, dude. But since you want to play games instead of continue your Intro Lecture and sales pitch, I'll play along a little. snip I think we are done. You misrepresented yourself as asking questions initially as a student, and now you mock me and disrespect me. Are you now saying, *as enlightenment speaking*, that there are CONDITIONS that must be met before you will dispense your invaluable information to someone else? Please enumerate them. As for respect, SO FAR you have said nothing that deserves mine, other than that I would offer to ANY sentient being. Respect other than that has to be *earned* IMO. You may earn yours by answering the four previous questions. Other- wise, I have to assume that you -- and remember by you we have defined your part in this con- versation as enlightenment speaking -- are bailing out the minute the questions get a little tough for you. I was of the opinion that enlight- enment was made of tougher stuff. I do not want any kind of student teacher relationship with anyone... But you do feel free to offer spiritual advice *to those who have never asked for it*. Did I get that right? I even asked, and in good faith. If you had answered in an impressive manner, I would have been perfectly willing to be impressed. That did not happen, SO FAR. I am treating you in this discussion the *same* way I would treat a Tibetan master of impeccable lineage who answered my questions the way you did. (And I have done exactly this...the Tibetan master laughed, and then gave better answers. *He* deserved my respect after that.) The thing is, Jim, you have never taught meditation. You have never stood in front of a room full of people and had to deal with questions like this. You seem to have all these fantasies about how the room full of people should *treat* you before you bestow upon them your awesome grace. Sorry dude, but that is not how the world works. Again, if you have CONDITIONS for continuing this conversation, spell them out. They *alone* would probably be fascinating, and I'd love to hear them. ...but thought perhaps it was one way to have a mutually respectful and insightful conversation with you. Best of luck to you. And to you. So far, you have done a fine job, in my opinion, of defining self-important solipsism. I have to say that you have NOT done either a good job of defining enlightenment, or of saying anything that would lead anyone to believe that you have attained that state, *even* as defined by yourself. I saw NOTHING in your criteria that could not be easily mood-made. MOST of your criteria, in fact, involved BELIEFS, not experiences. You clearly do not seem to know the difference. I'm giving you a fair chance here to make your case, Jim, to live up to the reality that *every other person in human history who has claimed to be enlight- ened* has ever faced. That is, the task of trying to convince someone else that 1) you *are*, in fact, enlightened, and 2) that that has any relevance to or value in their lives. I'm sorry, but you have NOT done a very good job. And now you want to bail, ostensibly because I didn't abide by rules that you never specified in the first place. If this is what you want to do, go for it. I will exit gracefully from this conversation. I suspect that I am not the only person here on this forum who will believe that your exit is as graceful. For the record, these are the four questions that you are refusing to deal with, ostensibly because I am not abiding by rules you never specified in the first place: 3. Can an enlightened being, as you have defined one using yourself as the definition, be mistaken about ANYTHING? 4. If someone who is enlightened as you have defined enlightened speaks or writes, can what that person says be assumed to be correct? In other words, are the enlightened always right when they say something? 5. Can you, as an enlightened being, present any reason why we should believe that following your advice would result in someone experiencing the things you claim to be experiencing? (You have been free in recent days to dispense advice; why should anyone follow it?) 6. Does the person who is enlightened (as you define it) have ANY responsibilities towards other sentient beings? (Everything you have said so far is solipsist to the max, presented only in terms of its benefits for YOU. Is there room in your definition of yourself as enlightened for anyone else, and for doing things that might benefit them?) You can claim until the cows come home that you are refusing to answer them because of some breach of etiquette, etiquette that you never specified in the first place, but I don't think anyone here is going to buy that. If you don't deal with these questions,
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero yifuxero@ wrote: ---(below - in my view). No. By all means, attain the Self, the non- dual state described by the Neo-Advaitins; but don't regard that as the ultimate goal, or even being close to Enlightenment, unless one has made the progression through the Kundalini signs. The Neo- Advaitins haven't done this. snip Experientially, in other words, in terms of inner freedom experienced in real life, (in other words, outside your head) there is little difference between living a non-dual state and accomplishing the signs that you speak of. Once the mind is free of encumbrances, there is little that the freedom of the body can add to the experience. This insistence of yours on attaining signs is just a way to keep the dissolution of your identity at bay. In other words, you remain bound to subtle elements of your ego, by insisting to yourself that true enlightenment has nothing to do with living a non-dual reality. I can see how the desire to attain signs, i.e., the desire to be a special person with a special mind/body, could keep awakening at bay. But, haven't there been great awakened masters who did attain such signs and teach that they are essential to awakening? If so, were they wrong? Personally, in all my seeking, I was never a seeker of enlightenment. I was only ever a seeker of a fix for the broken I/me story. It took me a year to figure out that in Waking Down, I was seeking yet another fix for the brokenness. But, I stuck with it and ended up in a hellish Dark Night of the Soul, from which I emerged in what yifuxero would probably deem a Neo-Advaitin state. (In reality, though, Waking Down's embodied awakening is both non-dual and Tantric. The Neo-Advaitin state sounds to me like more of a disembodied awakening where the I/me/mind/body story is denigrated and dismissed.) As before, my focus remains on the I/me story, and my shrink tells me that the usual prescription is to deal with the I/me story and do the inner work before awakening. Apparently, I'm doing it backwards. He tells me that for most of his clients, he has to create the container of spaciousness for them. With me, I supply my own internal spaciousness, and the result is that I can work through in months what typically takes years. It can be a pretty rough and bumpy ride, but it sure saves time and money. I was just down near Kansas City, on a Waking Down retreat, and I asked Krishna Gauci ( http://www.krishnasatsang.com/ ) about FFL's Buddhist fundamentalists who insist that one must achieve all these states of esoteric duality. Krishna's spiritual background includes Advaita and Dzogchen, and his response was along the lines of, Well, yeah, they're fundamentalists. But, he also speculated that embodied awakening would likely be a much more effective platform from which to actually achieve such states.
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: snip You *must* know? You do not have the right to must anything, dude. But since you want to play games instead of continue your Intro Lecture and sales pitch, I'll play along a little. snip I think we are done. You misrepresented yourself as asking questions initially as a student, and now you mock me and disrespect me. Jim, Who is it that feels disrespected? Others believing themselves E, have said they have searched high and low for the I and the I thought -- and in not finding it, consider themselves E. However, even banter has caused them to feel highly insulted. They may not be able to find the I -- but its clear to those around them. Like looking for one's glasses -- they can't find them -- even though they are in plain sight on their head, being worn. But the glasses are readily apparent to other. A common response of those who feel insulted is to return the favor. In most circumstances, where there is no insult felt, there is no insult thrown back (or thrown up). reat I see you periodically feeling insulted. And periodically throwing out copious insults. Is that really all going on with no sense of I and no sense of threat to your I?
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero yifuxero@ wrote: ---(below - in my view). No. By all means, attain the Self, the non- dual state described by the Neo-Advaitins; but don't regard that as the ultimate goal, or even being close to Enlightenment, unless one has made the progression through the Kundalini signs. The Neo- Advaitins haven't done this. snip Experientially, in other words, in terms of inner freedom experienced in real life, (in other words, outside your head) there is little difference between living a non-dual state and accomplishing the signs that you speak of. Once the mind is free of encumbrances, there is little that the freedom of the body can add to the experience. This insistence of yours on attaining signs is just a way to keep the dissolution of your identity at bay. In other words, you remain bound to subtle elements of your ego, by insisting to yourself that true enlightenment has nothing to do with living a non-dual reality. I can see how the desire to attain signs, i.e., the desire to be a special person with a special mind/body, could keep awakening at bay. But, haven't there been great awakened masters who did attain such signs and teach that they are essential to awakening? If so, were they wrong? Beats me-- I am just making the point that of course there is always further to go, but once the state of inner freedom is reached, there is a choice about further direction; the goal for all practical purposes has been reached, and the momentum carries on smoothly and inexorably from then on. Who knows what the circumstances were for the Masters teaching about attaining Sidhis as the complete package of enlightenment? I'll say that I suspect it wasn't part of a householder tradition-- who has the time, or really the inclination, given the sped up timeframe of today's worldly life? Personally I had a lot of special experiences; remote viewing of my master, opening of the crown chakra, blah blah blah, before I ever attained enlightenment, so who knows what the special significance of such experiences are? As for this discussion about neo advaitins, it sounds like something Vaj mentioned in a prior post, denigrating TM (what a surprise), that folks with no real realization do, as a mental exercise. Its essentially mood-making, and gives authentic realization a bad name. Personally, in all my seeking, I was never a seeker of enlightenment. I was only ever a seeker of a fix for the broken I/me story. snip I think most if not all seekers feel that way-- Enlightenment is too nebulous a concept seen from the outside, with tenuous benefits. Rather it is the things each of us is trying to fix or satisfy within ourselves that drives us to seek that goal, whatever we call it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another WWII holocaust
My ill tempered reaction was directed towards Brigante not the tragedy Angela. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What an ill-tempered reaction to a great tragedy! sgrayatlarge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Common Brigante, You must have dozens and dozens of Another WW11 Holocaust examples right? Anything to downplay what happen to Jews. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: A stark example is the Bengal famine of 1943, during the last days of the British rule in India. The poor who lived in cities experienced rapidly rising incomes, especially in Calcutta, where huge expenditures for the war against Japan caused a boom that quadrupled food prices. The rural poor faced these skyrocketing prices with little increase in income. Misdirected government policy worsened the division. The British rulers were determined to prevent urban discontent during the war, so the government bought food in the villages and sold it, heavily subsidized, in the cities, a move that increased rural food prices even further. Low earners in the villages starved. Two million to three million people died in that famine and its aftermath. (more) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/opinion/28sen.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip You *must* know? You do not have the right to must anything, dude. But since you want to play games instead of continue your Intro Lecture and sales pitch, I'll play along a little. snip I think we are done. You misrepresented yourself as asking questions initially as a student, and now you mock me and disrespect me. I do not want any kind of student teacher relationship with anyone, but thought perhaps it was one way to have a mutually respectful and insightful conversation with you. Best of luck to you. So, FFL's resident 'enlightened guy' takes a powder when the heat builds up under examination. Among other 'revealing' incongruities he attributes to himself, it's interesting that this self-proclaimed 'enlightened guy' claims that he creates his own reality when the scriptures all indicate it is false to assume authorship of action. my experiential reality is as I create it moment by moment. No more and no less. ~~ sandiego108 aka Jim Flanegan message #167802
[FairfieldLife] Re: Peter Rohr - Course in Rio
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
THANKS RICK I WILL TRY TO ATTEND SOUNDS VERY INTERESTING...
For you or your pet? Cuz if you are gunna ask what your pet is
thinking Louis, I think I can save you a buck or two.
His long lasting research and inner knowledge of the original causes
of diseases, encroachment and heteronomy have enabled him
to be of assistance to people and animals over the telephone, at
distance, and on location.
Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:v\:*
{behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape
{behavior:url(#default#VML);}From: Peter Rohr
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 9:37 AM
To: Satyam Ahimsa
Subject: *SPAM* Course in Rio
Peter´s second visit to Brazil
Peter Rohr is a body-energetics healer who works
with patients, therapists and health practitioners.
His long lasting research and inner knowledge of the original causes
of diseases, encroachment and heteronomy have enabled him
to be of assistance to people and animals over the telephone, at
distance, and on location.
His special ability is to connect people with their souls and
higher planes of divine intelligence.
He teaches how to communicate with those aspects of one´s inner
intelligence and personality
that are responsible for fulfilling manifestation experiences
on the soul, spiritual, emotional, mental and physical levels.
Peter is committed to teaching practical methods to increase
reality awareness,
and how to systematically cultivate self sufficiency, independency
and self empowerment
He is abundantly sharing his talents and gifts of accurate diagnoses,
clairvoyance and auto-recognition of the cause and effect
of inner conflicts, diseases and outer problems.
As a seminar teacher, he helps others to identify the causes of
inner conflicts and
dependencies from outside authorities and influences.
Peter resides in Heidelberg (Germany) and offers monthly seminars
and travels around
to share his gift of accurate diagnoses and healing with people
around the world
Weekend-Seminar
RIO DE JANEIRO
BRAZIL
JULY 19-20, 2008
MASTERY OF LIFE-KARMA
Karma is the eternal assertion of human freedom
..
Our thoughts, our words, and deeds are the threads
of the net which we throw around ourselves.
-Swami Vivekananda-
The target of this two day seminar is the dissolution of the
entire life karma from the time of conception til the real-time of the
present moment.
Introduction
Friday, JULY 18, 2008
7-9 PM
On Friday night (the evening before the seminar) there will be a
special introduction for all those who are not yet familiar with
multidimensional mode of their body intelligence. At this evening you
will learn how to communicate with your soul and with the ritam-level
of your consciousness. Please bring your horoscope (eastern or
western) with you. You will learn how to identify your prarabdha- and
samchita karma in your horoscope and and how to resolve it.
Working-Themes of the Seminar
1.
RETROVERSION OF LIFE-KARMA (intern)
Destiny, fate, doom, misfortune, guilt, misery,
grief, sorrow, bitterness, pain, disease, heartbreak
2.
RETROVERSION OF LIFE-KARMA (extern)
Rescission and redemption of self created guilt
and self created entropy and disorder in foreign systems
3.
RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF INCARNATION PRESENCE
Dissolution of heteronomy and dependency caused by actual fault
4.
RETROVERSION OF EMOTIONS
Accounting of unprocessed feelings and emotions
5.
RETROVERSION OF FAMILIY KARMA
Dissolution of karmic assets and unresolved charges
by motherly and fatherly line of ancestors
6.
RETROVERSION: ZEITGEIST, PARADIGMA
Dissolution of cultural, religious, national, social,
scientific and political conditioning and heteronomy
7.
RETROVERSION
MULTIDIMENSIONAL X-FACTOR-KARMA
Dissolution of internal and external non describable,
non definable, non identifiable encroachments,
interferences, manipulations, contaminations, interventions,
foreign and adverse influences
8.
MASTERY OF LIFE-KARMA
Reattaining the ability of action
through dissolution of corruptible susceptibility of one´s own
consciousness
9.
RETROVERSION OF FUTURE KARMA
Liberation from false, imaginary, alien, determined goals,
expectations, hopes, and wishful beliefs.
Training to tune one´s personality in real, upcoming,
and authentic needs, necessities, requirements and goals
of one´s soul, personality, emotions, mind and body.
Saturday, July 19
10 am 6 pm
Sunday, July 20
9:30
[FairfieldLife] More on the snit hitting the fan
http://tinyurl.com/6ozsyn Scott McClellan's book is now the #1 bestseller at Amazon. And the White House is continuing in shoot the messenger mode. The parallels to many of the things we've seen dis- cussed here on FFL do not escape me. McClellan writing a tell all book about his days inside the Bush White House is the equivalent of Bevan writing a similarly-scathing memoir of his time with Maharishi. Both were the mouthpieces for a cult persona, the persons whose *job* it was to spin any facts that did not reflect well on the cult persona and his policies, to hide other such facts, and to propagandize, as they had been told to do. Because I'm curious about this book and its effect, I've watched video of McClellan speaking. He reads on the level to me. I do NOT see bitterness or a disgruntled employee in his presentation and demeanor. Instead, what I see is a classic whistle- blower, someone who *participated* in the deceptions because he believed in the cult persona, and found a way to convince himself for a while that the ends justified the means. But who, somewhere along the way, rediscovered his conscience, and could no longer either participate, or maintain the code of silence. Can any of us here *identify* with this? I know I can. I think that his stated reasons for writing this book are on the level, and what a professional who had seen his profession demeaned and discredited *would* say, if what he wanted to do was change things. The permanent campaign culture that McClellan is decrying in George W. Bush Co. (*and* in himself, for participating in for so long), is the *same* campaign culture that sickens us in Hillary Clinton and in John McCain and, yes, in Obama, when it appears there. It is a mindset that is *antithetical* to truth, and does not respect truthfulness. Its only goal is to control public opinion. May Vincent Bugliosi's suggestion for how to deal with the cult persona himself come to pass, and may George W. Bush be tried for murder, and be fried in the electric chair. His cohorts can merely fry in Hell. I'll give Scott McClellan only a few years in Purgatory for his role in it all, because he showed some balls at the end. I'm being easy on him because, as an American, I will probably spend some time in Purgatory myself for allowing all this to happen.
[FairfieldLife] We get off on warfare
The latest from McCain's former spiritual guide Rod Parsley: We were built for battle! We were created for conflict! We get off on warfare!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
On May 29, 2008, at 9:49 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: I was just down near Kansas City, on a Waking Down retreat, and I asked Krishna Gauci ( http://www.krishnasatsang.com/ ) about FFL's Buddhist fundamentalists who insist that one must achieve all these states of esoteric duality. Krishna's spiritual background includes Advaita and Dzogchen, and his response was along the lines of, Well, yeah, they're fundamentalists. But, he also speculated that embodied awakening would likely be a much more effective platform from which to actually achieve such states. I think the place you're confused Alex is that not all experiences are dualistic and different experiences are handled differently--and for different reasons--on different paths. For example, at the level of Inner Tantra (either Buddhist or Hindu) experiences can be used to refine transcending to the point where one can release mind and the grasping to different patterns by grokking this experiential withdrawal. This withdrawal has certain subtle signs. But differently, at the nondual level we're not talking about conventional (dualistic) experiences at all, as it is not an observer observing an object, but vidya or pure knowing. Nonetheless we're stuck using dualistic lingo to try to convey what we're describing. If people have bought into to a certain paradigm, it's often hard to convey another POV in a way they will get the essence of what you are saying--esp. if the listeners are attached to their paradigm or believe it actually has some absolute value, purity or truth.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
bob_brigante wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: bob_brigante wrote: The bizarre thing is many other meditation techniques don't have side effects like is seen in TM. The reason why people unstress with TM is because that is a feature, not a defect. By exposing impure nervous systems to unbounded awareness/bliss, the nervous system starts to throw off all the twists and turns that stress has deposited there. When the mind/n.s. is free of such twists, 24/7 access to bliss consciousness is available to that transparent mind. Most meditation techniques only serve to make the mind more dull - - sort of an upscale alcohol relief effect -- so it's no wonder that they don't have a worthwhile effect, much less a side effect like unstressing. Most meditation techniques are like the TM advanced technique except they have the full mantra and are for another deity which provides a different and positive effect and certainly not dullness and stress is also dissolved. Let's not spin doctor with such ignorant bullshit from the MarshyBots. India is a country mired in poverty, violence, and unhappiness because the people have muddled ideas about how to meditate, which is more than picking a mantra off a shelf. It was the mission of Guru Dev and MMY to restore the centerpiece of Vedic knowledge -- the knowledge of TM -- to its authentic and effective practice. They did so, and the results of that mission will be soon clear enough even to people whose failure to practice an effective meditation technique renders them unable to evaluate the situation. And you drank that kool-aid and believed it!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Peter Rohr - Course in Rio
By contacting me in this way you give me permission to check via ritam whether your participation at this seminar is appropriate and suitable for your present situation. A psychic legal privacy disclosure! Now I've seen it all. I wonder if he could give me my credit FICA score while he's down there? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Peter Rohr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 9:37 AM To: Satyam Ahimsa Subject: *SPAM* Course in Rio Peter´s second visit to Brazil Peter Rohr is a body-energetics healer who works with patients, therapists and health practitioners. His long lasting research and inner knowledge of the original causes of diseases, encroachment and heteronomy have enabled him to be of assistance to people and animals over the telephone, at distance, and on location. His special ability is to connect people with their souls and higher planes of divine intelligence. He teaches how to communicate with those aspects of one´s inner intelligence and personality that are responsible for fulfilling manifestation experiences on the soul, spiritual, emotional, mental and physical levels. Peter is committed to teaching practical methods to increase reality awareness, and how to systematically cultivate self sufficiency, independency and self empowerment He is abundantly sharing his talents and gifts of accurate diagnoses, clairvoyance and auto-recognition of the cause and effect of inner conflicts, diseases and outer problems. As a seminar teacher, he helps others to identify the causes of inner conflicts and dependencies from outside authorities and influences. Peter resides in Heidelberg (Germany) and offers monthly seminars and travels around to share his gift of accurate diagnoses and healing with people around the world Weekend-Seminar RIO DE JANEIRO BRAZIL JULY 19-20, 2008 MASTERY OF LIFE-KARMA 14-27938 Karma is the eternal assertion of human freedom .. Our thoughts, our words, and deeds are the threads of the net which we throw around ourselves. -Swami Vivekananda- The target of this two day seminar is the dissolution of the entire life karma from the time of conception til the real-time of the present moment. Introduction Friday, JULY 18, 2008 7-9 PM On Friday night (the evening before the seminar) there will be a special introduction for all those who are not yet familiar with multidimensional mode of their body intelligence. At this evening you will learn how to communicate with your soul and with the ritam-level of your consciousness. Please bring your horoscope (eastern or western) with you. You will learn how to identify your prarabdha- and samchita karma in your horoscope and and how to resolve it. Working-Themes of the Seminar 1. RETROVERSION OF LIFE-KARMA (intern) Destiny, fate, doom, misfortune, guilt, misery, grief, sorrow, bitterness, pain, disease, heartbreak 2. RETROVERSION OF LIFE-KARMA (extern) Rescission and redemption of self created guilt and self created entropy and disorder in foreign systems 3. RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF INCARNATION PRESENCE Dissolution of heteronomy and dependency caused by actual fault 4. RETROVERSION OF EMOTIONS Accounting of unprocessed feelings and emotions 5. RETROVERSION OF FAMILIY KARMA Dissolution of karmic assets and unresolved charges by motherly and fatherly line of ancestors 6. RETROVERSION: ZEITGEIST, PARADIGMA Dissolution of cultural, religious, national, social, scientific and political conditioning and heteronomy 7. RETROVERSION MULTIDIMENSIONAL X-FACTOR-KARMA Dissolution of internal and external non describable, non definable, non identifiable encroachments, interferences, manipulations, contaminations, interventions, foreign and adverse influences 8. MASTERY OF LIFE-KARMA Reattaining the ability of action through dissolution of corruptible susceptibility of one´s own consciousness 9. RETROVERSION OF FUTURE KARMA Liberation from false, imaginary, alien, determined goals, expectations, hopes, and wishful beliefs. Training to tune one´s personality in real, upcoming, and authentic needs, necessities, requirements and goals of one´s soul, personality, emotions, mind and body. Saturday, July 19 10 am 6 pm Sunday, July 20 9:30 am 5 pm 12 am 1:30 pm: Lunchtime Course leader: Peter Rohr Course fee: 200.- Euro If you are interested or if you have any questions, please send med an E-Mail or call me directly. By contacting me in this way you give me permission to check via ritam whether your
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Bob wrote: It was the mission of Guru Dev and MMY to restore the centerpiece of Vedic knowledge... Barry wrote: And you drank that kool-aid and believed it! But, Barry, you're the 'TM' teacher.
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
Barry wrote: You do not have the right to must anything, dude. Jim wrote: You misrepresented yourself as asking questions initially as a student... John wrote: ...'enlightened guy' takes a powder when the heat builds up under examination. Both Barry and John are impostor TM teachers. They both got kicked out of the TMO because they couldn't even remember the TM puja. They both sucked as TM teachers, according to what I've heard. The messages they post here pretty much confirms this.
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
Uncle Tantra wrote: My definitions of enlightenment center around the relationship one has with other sentient beings. So, that's your definition of 'enlightenment', that there is a 'relationship' between 'sentient' beings. But what is the definition of 'sentience'? Sentience is the ability to feel or perceive subjectively. Sentience: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience So, you just introduced a 'circle jerk', an infinite regress. You defined 'enlightenment' as a 'sentient relationship' by saying that sentience is a relationship? In fact, a relationship indicates a dualism between at least two objects - there must be two things - one that is related and the other that is related to. You can't seem to get over your predilection for dualism. The last time you tried this silly dualism trick you got your ass kicked by Kater and a Penitent Leper! Read more: Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental; alt.religion.gnostic From: penitent leper Date: Thurs, Oct 16 2003 Subject: Re: Emperor's New Clothes http://tinyurl.com/6eodlm Enlightenment. Insight. Redemption. Why ask, when you can read the Gnostic scriptures yourself?
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip You *must* know? You do not have the right to must anything, dude. But since you want to play games instead of continue your Intro Lecture and sales pitch, I'll play along a little. snip I think we are done. You misrepresented yourself as asking questions initially as a student, and now you mock me and disrespect me. I do not want any kind of student teacher relationship with anyone, but thought perhaps it was one way to have a mutually respectful and insightful conversation with you. Best of luck to you. So, FFL's resident 'enlightened guy' takes a powder when the heat builds up under examination. Among other 'revealing' incongruities he attributes to himself, it's interesting that this self-proclaimed 'enlightened guy' claims that he creates his own reality when the scriptures all indicate it is false to assume authorship of action. my experiential reality is as I create it moment by moment. No more and no less. ~~ sandiego108 aka Jim Flanegan message #167802 You are talking apples and oranges here John. Claiming authorship of action is false attachment borne of ego. Creation of the world is as a result of the three gunas at play, creating all manifestation. Creation is a mechanical process which I do not own, resulting moment by moment in the world I experience. I am clear about that. Just because I create, does not mean I own. See the difference?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
On May 29, 2008, at 12:08 PM, sandiego108 wrote: You are talking apples and oranges here John. Claiming authorship of action is false attachment borne of ego. Creation of the world is as a result of the three gunas at play, Would that be Huey, Dewey, and Louie, Jim? creating all manifestation. Amen, brother. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Ruth wrote: I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. Get some smarts, Ruth - do a little research. 'Unstressing' is a pretty common concept in bio-medicine. In medical terms, stress is the disruption of homeostasis through physical or psychological stimuli. Stressful stimuli can be mental, physiological, anatomical or physical reactions. The term 'stress' in this context was coined by Hungarian-Canadian endocrinologist Hans Selye, who defined the General Adaptation Syndrome or GAS paradigm in 1936. Stress: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(medicine) Titles of interest: 'Stress without Distress' By Hans Selye Signet, 1975 http://tinyurl.com/55c4ll 'TM: Discovering Inner Energy and Overcoming Stress' by H. Harold, M.D Foreword By Hans Selye, M.D. Introduction By R. Buckminster Fuller
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 29, 2008, at 12:08 PM, sandiego108 wrote: You are talking apples and oranges here John. Claiming authorship of action is false attachment borne of ego. Creation of the world is as a result of the three gunas at play, Would that be Huey, Dewey, and Louie, Jim? creating all manifestation. Amen, brother. Sal Exactly! aka Manny, Moe and Jack- the Pep Boys aka Moe, Larry and Curly aka Isaac, Wayne and Fig...they're everywhere!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why do Buddhists attack?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals... ...because they resent the fact that we have plenty, and they have little or none. Neither do most brands have anything that amounts to TM's greatest asset, the Checking Procedure. Uns.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ruth wrote: I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. Get some smarts, Ruth - do a little research. 'Unstressing' is a pretty common concept in bio-medicine. In medical terms, stress is the disruption of homeostasis through physical or psychological stimuli. Stressful stimuli can be mental, physiological, anatomical or physical reactions. Richard, You are adding more pieces to the puzzle that you are. I see you doing this move in a number of posts. The bogus term is unstressing. The medically accepted term is stress. although I find Selye's terms distress and eustress more useful. So is your switch a deliberate move so you can use one of your harsh putdowns like get some smarts? This is trollish behavior Richard. Are you award of the difference in the terms stress and unstressing as used in Maharishi's movement or not? If you aren't then you just have a fundamental cognitive problem making distinctions. If you are aware of the distinction, then you are behaving trollishly. The term 'stress' in this context was coined by Hungarian-Canadian endocrinologist Hans Selye, who defined the General Adaptation Syndrome or GAS paradigm in 1936. Stress: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(medicine) Titles of interest: 'Stress without Distress' By Hans Selye Signet, 1975 http://tinyurl.com/55c4ll 'TM: Discovering Inner Energy and Overcoming Stress' by H. Harold, M.D Foreword By Hans Selye, M.D. Introduction By R. Buckminster Fuller
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why do Buddhists attack?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals... ...because they resent the fact that we have plenty, and they have little or none. Neither do most brands have anything that amounts to TM's greatest asset, the Checking Procedure. Uns. They hate you because of your freedom... TM awareness: seeing buddhism and other spiritual practices as competing brands, and WE'RE #1. Dissecting and finding errors in published research is a key common part of the scientific process, that's how it progresses. Feeling your research should be immune from being faulted means it's not really research, it's PR or dogma.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Curtis wrote: I literally tackled them, wrestled her to the floor and made her lay quietly with her eyes closed for 30 minutes. Is it really s wrong that this description gave me a boner? Well, I don't know if it's wrong, Curtis, but it sure seems bizarre. Did you try to use your 'ball-gag' on her? This is literally outrageous!!! Why does it always seem to come back to some kind of perverted sex with you? First, you screwed God's wife, Grace, and now you're wanting to screw a poor, bi-polar patient on the floor? What will it be next? You really sucked as a TM teacher.
[FairfieldLife] Start Where You Are
From Chapter 1, No Escape, No Problem from Start Where You Are by Pema Chodron ...We already have everything we need. There is no need for self-improvement. All these trips that we lay on ourselves-the heavy duty fearing that we're bad and hoping that we're good, the identities that we so clearly cling to, the rage, the jealousy and the addictions of all kinds-never touch our basic wealth. They are like clouds that temporarily block the sun. But all the time our warmth and brilliance are right here. This is who we really are. We are one blink of an eye from being fully awake...
[FairfieldLife] Satsang (was Re: Rising Insanity)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip You *must* know? You do not have the right to must anything, dude. But since you want to play games instead of continue your Intro Lecture and sales pitch, I'll play along a little. snip I think we are done. You misrepresented yourself as asking questions initially as a student, and now you mock me and disrespect me. I do not want any kind of student teacher relationship with anyone, but thought perhaps it was one way to have a mutually respectful and insightful conversation with you. Best of luck to you. So, FFL's resident 'enlightened guy' takes a powder when the heat builds up under examination. Among other 'revealing' incongruities he attributes to himself, it's interesting that this self-proclaimed 'enlightened guy' claims that he creates his own reality when the scriptures all indicate it is false to assume authorship of action. my experiential reality is as I create it moment by moment. No more and no less. ~~ sandiego108 aka Jim Flanegan message #167802 You are talking apples and oranges here John. Claiming authorship of action is false attachment borne of ego. Creation of the world is as a result of the three gunas at play, creating all manifestation. Creation is a mechanical process which I do not own, resulting moment by moment in the world I experience. I am clear about that. Just because I create, does not mean I own. See the difference? Then by logic you're stating that you ARE the mechanical process of creation which results in the world 'you' experience. But you have also previously stated that there is no 'you'. So *who* is experiencing when the non-existent 'you' is saying moment by moment in the world *I* experience? And you're further muddying the water by saying *you* [which you've stated doesn't exist] don't own* the mechanical process of creation. You're spouting a bunch of bullshit as far as I can see.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
You really sucked as a TM teacher. I think you need to update your insults Richard, that was two decades ago. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis wrote: I literally tackled them, wrestled her to the floor and made her lay quietly with her eyes closed for 30 minutes. Is it really s wrong that this description gave me a boner? Well, I don't know if it's wrong, Curtis, but it sure seems bizarre. Did you try to use your 'ball-gag' on her? This is literally outrageous!!! Why does it always seem to come back to some kind of perverted sex with you? First, you screwed God's wife, Grace, and now you're wanting to screw a poor, bi-polar patient on the floor? What will it be next? You really sucked as a TM teacher.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: Well, if someone who is irritable after meditating doesn't follow the instruction of taking longer to open the eyes and move around, can they truely be said to be meditating properly? I am sure that some are not meditating properly. But I'll tell ya, my first ex-husband was a siddha and followed all the recommendations and he was one irritable guy after meditating. Did he keep increasing his flying time? That goes completely against all instructions. 5 minutes is the minimal amount for someone, but you shouldn't increase it past that unless your life is going *really well* in all aspects, for the past 6 months. Sounds like he couldn't claim that, from you standpoint. The exception would be for someone doing Yogic Flying in a grouop, but even there, 10 minutes would be the limit, unless he could claim his life was going wonderfully smoothly continously for the past 6 months before he increased the period of flying time. Don't assume he was doing something wrong. As far as I know he was not. But I haven't been married to the guy for 25 years so who knows! I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. It is an explanation that cannot be disproved and is conveniently presented when people have problems. Often stressing seems to be a better explanation than unstressing. The process makes perfect sense. Relaxation due to less active mental activity, (apparently due to less thalimic-coritical loops) triggers unusual healing/normalization' mechanisms which lead to or include triggering of memories of the original stressor. So the process of meditation includes an inner stroke of less mental activity, followed by an outer stroke of greater mental activity, which can become pretty extreme in its intensity, good or bad, depending one what stress is being healed/normalized. It explains the whole range of phsyiological and mental/emotional experiences observed in TMers, including the most accute symptoms of unstressing and the most profound periods of mental quiescence, without having to evoke things that make no sense, such as drove them insane. Stress in the TM lexicon being defined similarly to Hans Selye's definition (not surprising since he introduced MMY to the term and theory of stress 40 years ago) but goes a bit beyond it to include the concept of a virtually stress-free nervous system, in a state MMY refers to as CC. Now, if the person is showing symptoms before TM and they get worse, perhaps TM is exacerbating them. If they don't show the symptoms until after they start TM, perhaps TM is exacerbating them. That STILL could be considered unstressing or normalization of the nervous system, but if the amount of TM they are practicing is interfering with their ability to enjoy life, than obviously, they are mediating too much and should reduce. How MUCH they should reduce is the question. For someone with a 20x 2 practice, there's 40 potential choices. Most people here recommend the final choice without considering an intermediate value for the reduction as a test. The established benefits of at least SOME relaxation suggest that it might be worth doing in lesser amounts. Suggesting a cold-turkey withdrawl automatically as some do here, makes little sense to ME. Lawson Curtis said it perfectly. Distress is quite different from unstressing, where the claim is something good is happening and that the nervous system is somehow being normalized.I do not buy the unstressing claim.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. It is an explanation that cannot be disproved and is conveniently presented when people have problems. Often stressing seems to be a better explanation than unstressing. I think perfectionist standards have something to do with this. Have you ever studied Albert Ellis's Rational Emotive Therapy? Sidha=perfection and I think this concept can lead to a low frustration tolerance. Interesting thought. I know of Ellis but haven't read him since the 70s. But yes, perfectionists have a very very low frustration threshold.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willytex@ wrote: Ruth wrote: I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. Get some smarts, Ruth - do a little research. 'Unstressing' is a pretty common concept in bio-medicine. In medical terms, stress is the disruption of homeostasis through physical or psychological stimuli. Stressful stimuli can be mental, physiological, anatomical or physical reactions. Richard, You are adding more pieces to the puzzle that you are. I see you doing this move in a number of posts. The bogus term is unstressing. The medically accepted term is stress. although I find Selye's terms distress and eustress more useful. So is your switch a deliberate move so you can use one of your harsh putdowns like get some smarts? This is trollish behavior Richard. Are you award of the difference in the terms stress and unstressing as used in Maharishi's movement or not? If you aren't then you just have a fundamental cognitive problem making distinctions. If you are aware of the distinction, then you are behaving trollishly. Thanks Curtis, I couldn't have send it better. I think there needs to be more of a conversation about the distress that some people feel. I am not claiming that it is a big problem, it is just one that is ignored beyond telling someone to rest enough.On one hand, calling it unstressing can help people feel like something is accomplished and that they are normal. On the other hand, if the distress does not go away, then problems can result. Maybe they need treatment for mental health issue like anxiety or depression and don't get the treatment. Maybe they feel that they are not practicing TM correctly (this is reinforced by movement people who make comments much like Lawson's comments). Maybe they waste their lives with a technique that does nothing for them and buy into more and more bogus pain relief, from supplements to east facing houses.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why do Buddhists attack?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor uns_tressor@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals... ...because they resent the fact that we have plenty, and they have little or none. Neither do most brands have anything that amounts to TM's greatest asset, the Checking Procedure. Uns. They hate you because of your freedom... TM awareness: seeing buddhism and other spiritual practices as competing brands, and WE'RE #1. Dissecting and finding errors in published research is a key common part of the scientific process, that's how it progresses. Feeling your research should be immune from being faulted means it's not really research, it's PR or dogma. Sure, however, ignoring the most recent 20 years of research isn't finding fault, or refuting, its simply ignoring inconvenient evidence. The TMO gets accused of that all the time, and perhaps rightfully so. However, Buddhist meditation researchers do it, and they are praised for their high standards. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willytex@ wrote: Ruth wrote: I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. Get some smarts, Ruth - do a little research. 'Unstressing' is a pretty common concept in bio-medicine. In medical terms, stress is the disruption of homeostasis through physical or psychological stimuli. Stressful stimuli can be mental, physiological, anatomical or physical reactions. Richard, You are adding more pieces to the puzzle that you are. I see you doing this move in a number of posts. The bogus term is unstressing. The medically accepted term is stress. although I find Selye's terms distress and eustress more useful. Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Thanks Curtis, I couldn't have send it better. I think there needs to be more of a conversation about the distress that some people feel. I am not claiming that it is a big problem, it is just one that is ignored beyond telling someone to rest enough.On one hand, calling it unstressing can help people feel like something is accomplished and that they are normal. On the other hand, if the distress does not go away, then problems can result. Maybe they need treatment for mental health issue like anxiety or depression and don't get the treatment. Maybe they feel that they are not practicing TM correctly (this is reinforced by movement people who make comments much like Lawson's comments). Maybe they waste their lives with a technique that does nothing for them and buy into more and more bogus pain relief, from supplements to east facing houses. So, did your irritable husband take the official advice about Yogic FLying or not? If he did, then you have a point. If not, you're just avoiding changing your stance, however, slightly, on the topic. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: Well, if someone who is irritable after meditating doesn't follow the instruction of taking longer to open the eyes and move around, can they truely be said to be meditating properly? I am sure that some are not meditating properly. But I'll tell ya, my first ex-husband was a siddha and followed all the recommendations and he was one irritable guy after meditating. Did he keep increasing his flying time? That goes completely against all instructions. 5 minutes is the minimal amount for someone, but you shouldn't increase it past that unless your life is going *really well* in all aspects, for the past 6 months. Sounds like he couldn't claim that, from you standpoint. The exception would be for someone doing Yogic Flying in a grouop, but even there, 10 minutes would be the limit, unless he could claim his life was going wonderfully smoothly continously for the past 6 months before he increased the period of flying time. Don't assume he was doing something wrong. As far as I know he was not. But I haven't been married to the guy for 25 years so who knows! So, did he keep extending his yogic lfying time while you knew him? If he was practicing by himself over 5 minutes at a time, then he was ignoring the instructions, which makes me wonder what else he was ignoring. I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. It is an explanation that cannot be disproved and is conveniently presented when people have problems. Often stressing seems to be a better explanation than unstressing. The process makes perfect sense. Relaxation due to less active mental activity, (apparently due to less thalimic-coritical loops) triggers unusual healing/normalization' mechanisms which lead to or include triggering of memories of the original stressor. So the process of meditation includes an inner stroke of less mental activity, followed by an outer stroke of greater mental activity, which can become pretty extreme in its intensity, good or bad, depending one what stress is being healed/normalized. It explains the whole range of phsyiological and mental/emotional experiences observed in TMers, including the most accute symptoms of unstressing and the most profound periods of mental quiescence, without having to evoke things that make no sense, such as drove them insane. Stress in the TM lexicon being defined similarly to Hans Selye's definition (not surprising since he introduced MMY to the term and theory of stress 40 years ago) but goes a bit beyond it to include the concept of a virtually stress-free nervous system, in a state MMY refers to as CC. Now, if the person is showing symptoms before TM and they get worse, perhaps TM is exacerbating them. If they don't show the symptoms until after they start TM, perhaps TM is exacerbating them. That STILL could be considered unstressing or normalization of the nervous system, but if the amount of TM they are practicing is interfering with their ability to enjoy life, than obviously, they are mediating too much and should reduce. How MUCH they should reduce is the question. For someone with a 20x 2 practice, there's 40 potential choices. Most people here recommend the final choice without considering an intermediate value for the reduction as a test. The established benefits of at least SOME relaxation suggest that it might be worth doing in lesser amounts. Suggesting a cold-turkey withdrawl automatically as some do here, makes little sense to ME. Lawson Curtis said it perfectly. Distress is quite different from unstressing, where the claim is something good is happening and that the nervous system is somehow being normalized.I do not buy the unstressing claim. Well, if it is due to TM itself, than its due to the relaxation of TM. Are you saying that relaxation is a bad thing for anyone, ever? Now, SOME people get anxious when they relax, which fits in perfectly with the TM theory of unstressing normalization. IN fact, TM theory predicts that virtually EVERYONE will feel anxious at some point during their TM practice, which isn't what non-TM scientists predict at all. THEY say that it is only anxiety-prone people who feel anxious, but TM theory says that ANY thought during meditation is a sign of unstressing/ normalization--that if you were completely normal, TM-wise, you wouldn't think during meditation. What is your explanation for people who don't think for 60% of the time they are meditating, as measured by the 60% of the time
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. I don't understand it that way. Eustress could just be the sun part of the cloth analogy. Eustress as I understand it is challenge that pushes you to greater ability and is considered positive in Selye's model right? The value of activities for infusing being was a big part of the story that supported fulltimers. Developing flexibility etc. was purported to be created by certain activities and often included a dose of sleep deprivation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willytex@ wrote: Ruth wrote: I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. Get some smarts, Ruth - do a little research. 'Unstressing' is a pretty common concept in bio-medicine. In medical terms, stress is the disruption of homeostasis through physical or psychological stimuli. Stressful stimuli can be mental, physiological, anatomical or physical reactions. Richard, You are adding more pieces to the puzzle that you are. I see you doing this move in a number of posts. The bogus term is unstressing. The medically accepted term is stress. although I find Selye's terms distress and eustress more useful. Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, did your irritable husband take the official advice about Yogic FLying or not? If he did, then you have a point. If not, you're just avoiding changing your stance, however, slightly, on the topic. Lawson As far as I know he followed the official advice about Yogic Flying and meditation in general, with the caveats that I haven't lived with him for years, memories fade, and the fact I don't live in his head. I am not drawing black and white lines here. I don't see the world that way.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why do Buddhists attack?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 29, 2008, at 7:13 AM, off_world_beings wrote: Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals, but do not approach any study or unpublished study on Buddhist meditation with the same vigor? Of course, this isn't what's happening. To merely point out the truth behind often terribly biased, poor methodology or simply greatly exaggerated claims is just pointing out the obvious. To TB's who actually believed it, it comes as a shock or even a heresy. But such are the pseudo-science cults. To ignore the most recent 20 years of research is to ignore the most recent evidence. Refuting studies performed 20+ years ago says nothing about today's studies, and yet, that is what you defend. Early Buddhist research was marginally interesting, but gradually improved beyond pilot studies into some groundbreaking research. And that continues. Mindfulness research is actually growing at a logarithmic rate accord to Jon Kabat-Zinn. And, what he calls mindfulness, I would call dhyan usng breathing as the object of attention, but by the nature of directing the attention towards a sensation or group of sensations, it will tend to be more limited in its long-term affect than dhyan using a mental device like a mantra. Because the findings were so convincing you now have Buddhist meditation taught at hospitals all over the US and it's spreading like wild fire in Britain and other places. No doubt, it is a reasonably effective technique. But, I would expect TM to be better, in the long run, for the above reason (leaving aside any beneficial side effects of using a specific mantra). Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 28, 2008, at 11:37 PM, bob_brigante wrote: India is a country mired in poverty, violence, and unhappiness because the people have muddled ideas about how to meditate, which is more than picking a mantra off a shelf. It was the mission of Guru Dev and MMY to restore the centerpiece of Vedic knowledge -- the knowledge of TM -- to its authentic and effective practice. They did so, and the results of that mission will be soon clear enough even to people whose failure to practice an effective meditation technique renders them unable to evaluate the situation. But TM is Tantric not Vedic Bob. It sounded nice though. I almost checked my hands for flaked off gold gilding! Heh. TM mantras predate tantra. And dhyan predates tantra. Upanishads predate tantra. So.. why is it trantric? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Sutras of Nityananda
Nityananda Institute presents Nityananda.us Selected Sutras, Part I These sutras were selected from The Sky of the Heart: Jewels of Wisdom from Nityananda, published by Rudra Press, the publishing division of Nityananda Institute. The accompanying commentaries are by Swami Chetanananda. SUTRA 1 The real sunrise is in the sky of the heart; It is the best one. Just as the water jar reflects the sun, So the entire universe shines In the heart-space of the Self. When you are in a train, the whole world Appears to pass by. Similarly, the whole universe can be known Within the Self. Commentary: Atman is used interchangeably with Self in these Sutras. Atman refers to the universal Self that manifests as a proliferation of rays emanating from itself. These rays are not different from the nature of their source, but only take on the appearance of separateness. Kundalini is the supreme conscious energy manifesting as an individuated person (jivatman). Paramatman is the Absolute. Both are Atman. It is the merging of Atman into Atman, like the merging of waves into water, that is the goal of spiritual practice: the union of the individual and the Divine. The Absolute, the Supreme, Paramatman, Brahman, the Self are all synonymous with Atman in these sutras. The image of chidakash is also central to Nityananda's teaching as given in these Sutras; the word is formed of the roots chit, consciousness, and akasha, space or sky, and is thus poetically translated as the sky of consciousness. It is synonymous with hridayakasha, sky of the heart. Chidakash is an experience; it is a state of consciousness in which perception is objectless and limitlessly vast, a state in which the individual and the universal are in complete union. In various disciplines, this experience of Oneness may be called samadhi, turiya, nirvana or shunya. Nityananda also called this heart-space of the Atman the Brahmarandhra, and the sahasrara chakra, the thousand-petaled lotus; for him, these were all the same. They all refer to that secret point in the head where the light of consciousness shines in its purest form. When an individual's kundalini energy is completely roused, it merges into this place in the head. The awakening that occurs in our understanding at that time reveals our complete and total unity in the Divine. When we realize that we are in God and that God is in us, then there is nothing outside of us. All knowledge is accessible from within. SUTRA 6 Why do you hold an umbrella? For protection from the rain. The illusion of duality is the rainMaya, Truth is the umbrella, And a steadfast mind is the handle. Truth is in everything but few people realize it. Maya, the cosmic power responsible for our Sense of duality, comes from the Self The Self does not come from Maya. The prime minister is under the king, But he is not the king. The mind is not the Self It is a reflection of the Self. The mind is two grades below the Self. The mind has an end, But the Self has no end. The mind is often deluded, But the Self is not deluded, and not subject To three forms of manifest reality The dense, the dynamic, the still. Such qualities apply only to the mind. The mind is to the Self As the river is to the sea. The Self is the sea, its water measureless. The Self is without beginning or end. The Self does not come and it does not go. Wherever you turn, it is there. Nothing else is seen. The Self is there before you and it is there After you; Even before you were born, there was creation. Only you are unaware. Commentary: The three primary gunas are sattva, rajas, and tamas. Collectively, they are Prakriti, cosmic Nature, the stuff of all manifestation. They are simply three different forms of manifestation: still, dynamic and dense. Sattva guna is pure space, pure light, pure peace. Tamas guna is the opposite; it is density, darkness and inertia. Rajas guna is fire and dynamic activity. They are at once hierarchical and not hierarchical, since the peace exists in everyone, everyone has dynamic capability, and there is also inertia in everyone. It is just another way of speaking about the spectrum of manifestation. Tamas guna (inertia, thickness) is one end of the spectrum, sattva guna (pure light) is the opposite end, and rajas guna is the meeting of the two, for when pure light and pure density meet, the result is fire. Yet upon reaching sattva guna, there is no more hierarchy. In the pure state of sattva guna, everything is seen as equal; there is no separate mind, no chakras, no nadisnothing is separate. Sattva guna is pure and perfect balance. In man, these gunas are found in a state of instability. Sattva causes moments of inspiration, meditative calm, quiet joy, and disinterested affection. Rajas brings out constructive activity, energy, enthusiasm, and physical courage as well as ambition and rage. Tamas is associated with the lowest qualities such as sloth, stupidity, helpless
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Interesting thought. I know of Ellis but haven't read him since the 70s. But yes, perfectionists have a very very low frustration threshold. He talks about thought patterns and beliefs that give rise to unpleasant emotions. He uses some funny terms like don't should on yourself and don't inflict yourself with musterbation. His student Dr. David Burn has carried on his work and I am happy to see that it has become extremely popular in psych circles. Much can be accomplished through his books and it really helped me get my head on straight after being fulltime in TM so long. Many of the beliefs I had accumulated were not leading me to my best state of happiness. I still mentally refer to some principle or other almost every day. It is a sanity resource and just being in the habit of refuting the erroneous thought patterns as they come up has been very helpful for me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I do not believe in unstressing. The concept makes no sense to me whatsoever. It is an explanation that cannot be disproved and is conveniently presented when people have problems. Often stressing seems to be a better explanation than unstressing. I think perfectionist standards have something to do with this. Have you ever studied Albert Ellis's Rational Emotive Therapy? Sidha=perfection and I think this concept can lead to a low frustration tolerance. Interesting thought. I know of Ellis but haven't read him since the 70s. But yes, perfectionists have a very very low frustration threshold.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: So, did your irritable husband take the official advice about Yogic FLying or not? If he did, then you have a point. If not, you're just avoiding changing your stance, however, slightly, on the topic. Lawson As far as I know he followed the official advice about Yogic Flying and meditation in general, with the caveats that I haven't lived with him for years, memories fade, and the fact I don't live in his head. I am not drawing black and white lines here. I don't see the world that way. Well, you were the one who complained that he was an irritable person, presumably irritable enough that you recall episodes 25 years later. I'm just wondering if he flew for a minimal period or for 30 minutes or... Seems to me that the difference between a 45 minute meditation/yogic flying session and what could be a 2 hour session, should have stuck in your mind as well. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. I don't understand it that way. Eustress could just be the sun part of the cloth analogy. Eustress as I understand it is challenge that pushes you to greater ability and is considered positive in Selye's model right? The value of activities for infusing being was a big part of the story that supported fulltimers. Developing flexibility etc. was purported to be created by certain activities and often included a dose of sleep deprivation. Sun fading the cloth happens with ANY activity, good or bad. The FACT that someone is not established in the Self, is seen as evidence that 'they still have stress in their system (at least enough to prevent CC). Eustress is more pleasant than distress, but both are stress --in TM terms, if you're not enlightened, than you're still stressed (would be anyway since no-one is without SOME level of stress, but there's a level of stress past which people can't maintain Self). Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. I don't understand it that way. Eustress could just be the sun part of the cloth analogy. Eustress as I understand it is challenge that pushes you to greater ability and is considered positive in Selye's model right? The value of activities for infusing being was a big part of the story that supported fulltimers. Developing flexibility etc. was purported to be created by certain activities and often included a dose of sleep deprivation. Yes, yes, yes. Stress can be good. You are hungry, you eat. You want to ride a bike, you may fall a few times. People strive and are competitive and handling the distress involved in learning is a big advantage. I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Sun fading the cloth happens with ANY activity, good or bad. The FACT that someone is not established in the Self, is seen as evidence that 'they still have stress in their system (at least enough to prevent CC). Eustress is more pleasant than distress, but both are stress --in TM terms, if you're not enlightened, than you're still stressed (would be anyway since no-one is without SOME level of stress, but there's a level of stress past which people can't maintain Self). I don't share your concepts of maintain Self or stress in their system but thanks for your POV. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. I don't understand it that way. Eustress could just be the sun part of the cloth analogy. Eustress as I understand it is challenge that pushes you to greater ability and is considered positive in Selye's model right? The value of activities for infusing being was a big part of the story that supported fulltimers. Developing flexibility etc. was purported to be created by certain activities and often included a dose of sleep deprivation. Sun fading the cloth happens with ANY activity, good or bad. The FACT that someone is not established in the Self, is seen as evidence that 'they still have stress in their system (at least enough to prevent CC). Eustress is more pleasant than distress, but both are stress --in TM terms, if you're not enlightened, than you're still stressed (would be anyway since no-one is without SOME level of stress, but there's a level of stress past which people can't maintain Self). Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: So, did your irritable husband take the official advice about Yogic FLying or not? If he did, then you have a point. If not, you're just avoiding changing your stance, however, slightly, on the topic. Lawson As far as I know he followed the official advice about Yogic Flying and meditation in general, with the caveats that I haven't lived with him for years, memories fade, and the fact I don't live in his head. I am not drawing black and white lines here. I don't see the world that way. Well, you were the one who complained that he was an irritable person, presumably irritable enough that you recall episodes 25 years later. I'm just wondering if he flew for a minimal period or for 30 minutes or... Seems to me that the difference between a 45 minute meditation/yogic flying session and what could be a 2 hour session, should have stuck in your mind as well. Lawson To the best of my recollection, his total program was approximately one hour in the morning and one hour in the afternoon, unless he was off at some program or another. Which made it worse.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept? It may be a remake of the yogic idea of burning smaskaras. I think he tried it out and the reaction was so good in the West that he ran with it. It is kind of funny that we sort of instilled a phobia about all this stress in the nervous system in the intro lecture and then sold the solution to the problem we had created in their minds! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. I don't understand it that way. Eustress could just be the sun part of the cloth analogy. Eustress as I understand it is challenge that pushes you to greater ability and is considered positive in Selye's model right? The value of activities for infusing being was a big part of the story that supported fulltimers. Developing flexibility etc. was purported to be created by certain activities and often included a dose of sleep deprivation. Yes, yes, yes. Stress can be good. You are hungry, you eat. You want to ride a bike, you may fall a few times. People strive and are competitive and handling the distress involved in learning is a big advantage. I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept? Sorry I mistyped samskaras! It may be a remake of the yogic idea of burning smaskaras. I think he tried it out and the reaction was so good in the West that he ran with it. It is kind of funny that we sort of instilled a phobia about all this stress in the nervous system in the intro lecture and then sold the solution to the problem we had created in their minds! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. I don't understand it that way. Eustress could just be the sun part of the cloth analogy. Eustress as I understand it is challenge that pushes you to greater ability and is considered positive in Selye's model right? The value of activities for infusing being was a big part of the story that supported fulltimers. Developing flexibility etc. was purported to be created by certain activities and often included a dose of sleep deprivation. Yes, yes, yes. Stress can be good. You are hungry, you eat. You want to ride a bike, you may fall a few times. People strive and are competitive and handling the distress involved in learning is a big advantage. I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
On May 29, 2008, at 3:32 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept? Sorry I mistyped samskaras! At least you didn't write mascara, Curtis. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Chimp-in-Chief Acting Out
You may not want to look at these images if you've recently had something to eat but check out the pathetic antics of the Commanding Chimpanzee at the Air Force Academy graduation: http://www.tinyurl.com.au/x.php?sdy
[FairfieldLife] This - FairfieldLife - is one strange place
[FairfieldLife] Re: This - FairfieldLife - is one strange place
And after that, s/he immediately unsubscribed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This - FairfieldLife - is one strange place
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And after that, s/he immediately unsubscribed. * Just hasn't spent enuf time breaking off beer bottles for poolhall fightin'
[FairfieldLife] Rupert Murdoch Says Obama Will Win [video]
Tonight at the All Things Digital conference sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch -- Chairman of News Corp, new WSJ owner, and longtime torchbearer for conservative politics -- said this about Barack Obama: He is a rock star. It's fantastic I love what he is saying about education. I don't think he will win Florida.but he will win in Ohio and the election. I am anxious to meet him. I want to see if he will walk the walk. About the presumptive Republican nominee, Murdoch said, McCain is a friend of mine. He's a patriot. But he's unpredictable. Doesn't seem to know much about the economy. He has been in Congress a long time, and you have to make a lot of compromises. So what's he really stand for?... I think he has a lot of problems. Video here: http://tinyurl.com/4fenln
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
But TM is Tantric not Vedic Bob. Lawson wrote: TM mantras predate tantra. There are no specific 'TM' mantras; there are 'bija' mantras that are used in TM. But there are no bija mantras mentioned in the Rig Veda. The use of bija mantras came after the composition of the Vedas, during the Gupta Age of the Indian alchemists, the Nath Siddhas. To be more specific, the Vedas are composed of 'mantras', but there are no 'bija' mantras mentioned. Even the mono-syllable 'OM' isn't mentioned in the Rig Veda (circa 1500 BCE). And dhyan predates tantra. The first historical reference to 'dhyan' is in the Buddhist Sutras, circa (463 BCE). Before that, there was is no historical record. The written language in India first appears on a Ashokan pillar at Sarnath (circa 200 BCE). Upanishads predate tantra. All the Upanishads came after the historical Buddha. So.. why is it trantric? The practice of TM is considered to be 'tantric' because the practice entails most all of the elements of tantrism: sadhana, use of bija mantras, hatha yoga, and devotional puja. In fact, TM practice is almost pure 'tantra'. All the Shankaracharyas worship Tripurasundari, (Saraswati) the tantric Goddess of Knowledge. Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was a member of the Sri Vidya sect headquarterd at Sringeri, one of the original four maths established by Shankaracharya. The Adi Shankara was a tantric adherent who composed the main text of the Sri Vidya sect, the Saundaryalahari, which contains several TM bija mantras.
Re: [FairfieldLife] This - FairfieldLife - is one strange place
This is nothing--just wait until the full moon comes out! Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
'TM: Discovering Inner Energy and Overcoming Stress' by H. Harold, M.D Foreword By Hans Selye, M.D. Introduction By R. Buckminster Fuller Curtis wrote: Are you award of the difference in the terms stress and unstressing as used in Maharishi's movement or not? You are supposed to read the book BEFORE you post your comments, Curtis. 'Stress without Distress' By Hans Selye Signet, 1975 http://tinyurl.com/55c4ll
[FairfieldLife] Re: This - FairfieldLife - is one strange place
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And after that, s/he immediately unsubscribed. It was just one of Shemp's many ID's OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another WWII holocaust
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My ill tempered reaction was directed towards Brigante not the tragedy Angela. ** What a lowlife like you thinks about anything is of no consequence, but for the list I will post what Simon Wiesenthal said (he came to realize that it was a mistake to only talk about the 6 million Jews who died in Nazi camps, about half of whose victims were not Jewish): Over the years, Wiesenthal sought greater recognition for the sufferings of the gypsies, communists and others under the Nazi regime as well as the wartime efforts of Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg, who aided Jews and disappeared mysteriously in 1945 while in the custody of the Soviet army. http://tinyurl.com/4qhgmf A Jewish critic who never ceased to rile Wiesenthal was Elie Wiesel, the prominent Jewish thinker. They originally crossed swords over Wiesenthal's contention that Jews must be just as much concerned for the non-Jewish victims of the Holocaust as for their own race. http://tinyurl.com/43hdp6 -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: What an ill-tempered reaction to a great tragedy! sgrayatlarge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Common Brigante, You must have dozens and dozens of Another WW11 Holocaust examples right? Anything to downplay what happen to Jews. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: A stark example is the Bengal famine of 1943, during the last days of the British rule in India. The poor who lived in cities experienced rapidly rising incomes, especially in Calcutta, where huge expenditures for the war against Japan caused a boom that quadrupled food prices. The rural poor faced these skyrocketing prices with little increase in income. Misdirected government policy worsened the division. The British rulers were determined to prevent urban discontent during the war, so the government bought food in the villages and sold it, heavily subsidized, in the cities, a move that increased rural food prices even further. Low earners in the villages starved. Two million to three million people died in that famine and its aftermath. (more) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/opinion/28sen.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why do Buddhists attack?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor uns_tressor@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Why do Buddhists dissect, distort, and attack the research on TM published in respected peer-reviewed journals... ...because they resent the fact that we have plenty, and they have little or none. Neither do most brands have anything that amounts to TM's greatest asset, the Checking Procedure. Uns. They hate you because of your freedom... TM awareness: seeing buddhism and other spiritual practices as competing brands, and WE'RE #1. Dissecting and finding errors in published research is a key common part of the scientific process, that's how it progresses. Feeling your research should be immune from being faulted means it's not really research, it's PR or dogma. It is not being dissected by Vaj, or you, or any one of the others. It is just being denied. Just like the Bible-Thumpers denying evolution, and that the Universe is 15 billion years old instead of 6 thousand. Your unscientific analyses puts you in the same boat as that crowd of nutters. Talk about dogmatic -- denying and publicly decrying research without using scientific analyitical techniques to do so, and then espousing research that is neither published, nor repeated, nor valid in any way. That is cult like behavior from you of a very extreme caliber. So given these well established facts, why do so called Buddhists attack without any credible evidence whatsoever? OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rupert Murdoch Says Obama Will Win [video]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tonight at the All Things Digital conference sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch -- Chairman of News Corp, new WSJ owner, and longtime torchbearer for conservative politics -- said this about Barack Obama: He is a rock star. It's fantastic I love what he is saying about education. I don't think he will win Florida.but he will win in Ohio and the election. I am anxious to meet him. I want to see if he will walk the walk. About the presumptive Republican nominee, Murdoch said, McCain is a friend of mine. He's a patriot. But he's unpredictable. Doesn't seem to know much about the economy. He has been in Congress a long time, and you have to make a lot of compromises. So what's he really stand for?... I think he has a lot of problems. Video here: http://tinyurl.com/4fenln Rupert Muroch is lying through his teeth. This archconservative owner of rightwing trash like Fox News is merely pimping Obama's prospects because he wants the Demos to put up the least electable candidate. Remember when he was backing Hillary Clinton? Murdoch dumped her when an even more unelectable candidate showed up in the person of Obama. The funniest thing about Murdoch's life is his complete transformation from wannabe communist to blowhard neocon: at Oxford, he was called Red Rupert because his commitment to commie ideology was so fervent that he had a bust of Lenin on his desk. http://tinyurl.com/3nkjob
[FairfieldLife] QUESTION
What would happen if Obama chose McCain as his running mate and McCain accepted To me that would be a big twist. Never been done before yet none of the above has been done before. Maybe it is time to start blogging that idea.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Lawson wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The term 'stress' was coined by Hans Selye the 'father' of the stress hypothesis. He called negative stress 'distress' and positive stress 'eustress'. The latter being Marshy's equivelent term 'unstress' which has the very same meaning. Eustress is defined as 'stress that is healthy or gives one a feeling of fulfillment'. Read more: 'The Stress of Life' by Hans Selye McGraw-Hill, 1978 TMO Checking Notes: 1. Physiological abnormality at the material or structural level caused by undo pressure of experience. 2. The natural and most effective way of eliminating stress is through rest.
[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What would happen if Obama chose McCain as his running mate and McCain accepted To me that would be a big twist. Never been done before yet none of the above has been done before. Maybe it is time to start blogging that idea. Put down the bong Louis. You attended MIU. Did you graduate?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The Big-S Self is the exact opposite of Selye's stereotypical physiological response. Selye told MMY about 40 years ago that meditation was the exact opposite, but I think that that was because he hadn't seen the transcendental consciousness research at that time. I don't understand it that way. Eustress could just be the sun part of the cloth analogy. Eustress as I understand it is challenge that pushes you to greater ability and is considered positive in Selye's model right? The value of activities for infusing being was a big part of the story that supported fulltimers. Developing flexibility etc. was purported to be created by certain activities and often included a dose of sleep deprivation. Yes, yes, yes. Stress can be good. You are hungry, you eat. You want to ride a bike, you may fall a few times. People strive and are competitive and handling the distress involved in learning is a big advantage. But not what TM is about, per se. I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept? Other than the concept of relaxation-induced anxiety, a term found in the DSM? ANd MMY's exposition is using modern terminology to discuss ancient theories of samskaras and so on.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sun fading the cloth happens with ANY activity, good or bad. The FACT that someone is not established in the Self, is seen as evidence that 'they still have stress in their system (at least enough to prevent CC). Eustress is more pleasant than distress, but both are stress --in TM terms, if you're not enlightened, than you're still stressed (would be anyway since no-one is without SOME level of stress, but there's a level of stress past which people can't maintain Self). I don't share your concepts of maintain Self or stress in their system but thanks for your POV. Not a concept. Merely a label put on a physiological state, or, one possible interpretation of the inner landscape associated with that state, if you prefer. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: So, did your irritable husband take the official advice about Yogic FLying or not? If he did, then you have a point. If not, you're just avoiding changing your stance, however, slightly, on the topic. Lawson As far as I know he followed the official advice about Yogic Flying and meditation in general, with the caveats that I haven't lived with him for years, memories fade, and the fact I don't live in his head. I am not drawing black and white lines here. I don't see the world that way. Well, you were the one who complained that he was an irritable person, presumably irritable enough that you recall episodes 25 years later. I'm just wondering if he flew for a minimal period or for 30 minutes or... Seems to me that the difference between a 45 minute meditation/yogic flying session and what could be a 2 hour session, should have stuck in your mind as well. Lawson To the best of my recollection, his total program was approximately one hour in the morning and one hour in the afternoon, unless he was off at some program or another. Which made it worse. So, like many/most people in the TMO, he ignored his own guru's teachings and ignored all the warning signs that he was meditating too much. That's not too surprising. MMY learned to ignore things himself. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Chimp-in-Chief Acting Out
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You may not want to look at these images if you've recently had something to eat but check out the pathetic antics of the Commanding Chimpanzee at the Air Force Academy graduation: http://www.tinyurl.com.au/x.php?sdy EH, he trained with people like that 40 years ago. He was in his element. Lawson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION
Transferred to UCSD okpeachman2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: What would happen if Obama chose McCain as his running mate and McCain accepted To me that would be a big twist. Never been done before yet none of the above has been done before. Maybe it is time to start blogging that idea. Put down the bong Louis. You attended MIU. Did you graduate? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lawson wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The term 'stress' was coined by Hans Selye the 'father' of the stress hypothesis. He called negative stress 'distress' and positive stress 'eustress'. The latter being Marshy's equivelent term 'unstress' which has the very same meaning. Eustress is defined as 'stress that is healthy or gives one a feeling of fulfillment'. But, in MMY's lexicon, any experience that overshadows Self is a stress, no matter how pleasant it is. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Carville: I Think Obama Will Win General Election
Prominent Hillary supporter James Carville diverges from the Hillary campaign message on several key electability questions in an interview with TPM Election Central. If he gets what Kerry got he will still win the election, because the dynamics have changed, he says. Asked if he thought Obama would beat McCain, Carville said: I think he will. I think Democrats will win in November...There's a crushing desire for change in this country. No one has seen a party or brand held in such low esteem than the Republicans. [...] Carville stressed that he thought Hillary was a better bet against McCain, but reiterated his confidence in Obama. Hillary would be a stronger candidate, but I think he'll win this thing, Carville said. http://tinyurl.com/44y8g3
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
The term 'stress' was coined by Hans Selye the 'father' of the stress hypothesis. He called negative stress 'distress' and positive stress 'eustress'. The latter being Marshy's equivelent term 'unstress' which has the very same meaning. Eustress is defined as 'stress that is healthy or gives one a feeling of fulfillment'. And how does that relate to Maharishi's concept? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lawson wrote: Both are stress in TM terms: they are experiences that overwhelm Self. The term 'stress' was coined by Hans Selye the 'father' of the stress hypothesis. He called negative stress 'distress' and positive stress 'eustress'. The latter being Marshy's equivelent term 'unstress' which has the very same meaning. Eustress is defined as 'stress that is healthy or gives one a feeling of fulfillment'. Read more: 'The Stress of Life' by Hans Selye McGraw-Hill, 1978 TMO Checking Notes: 1. Physiological abnormality at the material or structural level caused by undo pressure of experience. 2. The natural and most effective way of eliminating stress is through rest.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
Curtis wrote: Are you award of the difference in the terms stress and unstressing as used in Maharishi's movement or not? You are supposed to read the book BEFORE you post your comments, Curtis. I have and your dodge isn't working. You are running a routine which disrupts any chance for conversation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'TM: Discovering Inner Energy and Overcoming Stress' by H. Harold, M.D Foreword By Hans Selye, M.D. Introduction By R. Buckminster Fuller Curtis wrote: Are you award of the difference in the terms stress and unstressing as used in Maharishi's movement or not? You are supposed to read the book BEFORE you post your comments, Curtis. 'Stress without Distress' By Hans Selye Signet, 1975 http://tinyurl.com/55c4ll
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: So, did your irritable husband take the official advice about Yogic FLying or not? If he did, then you have a point. If not, you're just avoiding changing your stance, however, slightly, on the topic. Lawson As far as I know he followed the official advice about Yogic Flying and meditation in general, with the caveats that I haven't lived with him for years, memories fade, and the fact I don't live in his head. I am not drawing black and white lines here. I don't see the world that way. Well, you were the one who complained that he was an irritable person, presumably irritable enough that you recall episodes 25 years later. I'm just wondering if he flew for a minimal period or for 30 minutes or... Seems to me that the difference between a 45 minute meditation/yogic flying session and what could be a 2 hour session, should have stuck in your mind as well. Lawson To the best of my recollection, his total program was approximately one hour in the morning and one hour in the afternoon, unless he was off at some program or another. Which made it worse. So, like many/most people in the TMO, he ignored his own guru's teachings and ignored all the warning signs that he was meditating too much. That's not too surprising. MMY learned to ignore things himself. Lawson As easy as ignoring 50 post limits. How can you exceed 2 out of the last 3 weeks and and continue? I like you and sometimes actually read your posts, but that shemp guy got whacked for the same. I guess his was quite willfully over the top.
[FairfieldLife] Posting Limits
I haven’t been paying attention, but I just checked and discovered that several are near, at, or over the weekly posting limit (of 50). Jim (sandiego) – 49 Turq – 50 Louis McKenzie – 50 Judy – 53 Lawson – 65 I’ll cut Judy some slack because she is always conscientious and my count may be off slightly. Lawson is out for two weeks. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.3/1472 - Release Date: 5/29/2008 7:27 AM
[FairfieldLife] TMer Jeff Peckman to show authentic alien video tomorrow
Jeff Peckman, former Washington D.C. TMO 'Senate' (national TMO office) official, lives in Denver and occasionally promotes TMO initiatives there. Jeff is very much in the news today, as the Drudge Report notes, as tomorrow Jeff will present to the international media a close- up video of an alien inside a spaceship. See the article at http://tiny.cc/RrDwr Ignore the error message and look for the Most Viewed section.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMer Jeff Peckman to show authentic alien video tomorrow
Correction: the video shows an 'alien' peeking through a window of a house, not a spaceship. Sorry for the disinformation... ;) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jeff Peckman, former Washington D.C. TMO 'Senate' (national TMO office) official, lives in Denver and occasionally promotes TMO initiatives there. Jeff is very much in the news today, as the Drudge Report notes, as tomorrow Jeff will present to the international media a close- up video of an alien inside a spaceship. See the article at http://tiny.cc/RrDwr Ignore the error message and look for the Most Viewed section.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand this well enough. But to expand that concept to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is unwarranted in my mind. Did anyone other than MMY promote the unstressing concept? It may be a remake of the yogic idea of burning smaskaras. I think he tried it out and the reaction was so good in the West that he ran with it. It is kind of funny that we sort of instilled a phobia about all this stress in the nervous system in the intro lecture and then sold the solution to the problem we had created in their minds! Actually in the 60's -- at least67-67, he called it Unwinding as in unwinditng the knots of samskara. I like that term better.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMer Jeff Peckman to show authentic alien video tomorrow
Well, if it is real, I just hope Peckman and Romanek have tight security. (Note: An if, then, statement follows) - If they are real, then there has been a cover-up somewhere. Therefore, let's hope the cover-upers are not low enough to stoop to breaking the 1st Commandment. I hope Peckman and Romanek have taken all measures to protect themselves. (Note: An if, then, statement follows) If it is known that they have, and one of them dies before the public release in a month or two, then we know there is a cover-up and a murder. Period. With the aforementioned, the Black Ops folks are in a bit of a pickle now. OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jeff Peckman, former Washington D.C. TMO 'Senate' (national TMO office) official, lives in Denver and occasionally promotes TMO initiatives there. Jeff is very much in the news today, as the Drudge Report notes, as tomorrow Jeff will present to the international media a close- up video of an alien inside a spaceship. See the article at http://tiny.cc/RrDwr Ignore the error message and look for the Most Viewed section.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMer Jeff Peckman to show authentic alien video tomorrow
According to the Rocky Mountain News, Jeff, age 54, and single, still lives with his parents. that should offer some security, don't ya think ? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, if it is real, I just hope Peckman and Romanek have tight security. (Note: An if, then, statement follows) - If they are real, then there has been a cover-up somewhere. Therefore, let's hope the cover-upers are not low enough to stoop to breaking the 1st Commandment. I hope Peckman and Romanek have taken all measures to protect themselves. (Note: An if, then, statement follows) If it is known that they have, and one of them dies before the public release in a month or two, then we know there is a cover-up and a murder. Period. With the aforementioned, the Black Ops folks are in a bit of a pickle now. OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20016@ wrote: Jeff Peckman, former Washington D.C. TMO 'Senate' (national TMO office) official, lives in Denver and occasionally promotes TMO initiatives there. Jeff is very much in the news today, as the Drudge Report notes, as tomorrow Jeff will present to the international media a close- up video of an alien inside a spaceship. See the article at http://tiny.cc/RrDwr Ignore the error message and look for the Most Viewed section.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TMer Jeff Peckman to show authentic alien video tomorrow
I thought the name was familiar! --- mainstream20016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: According to the Rocky Mountain News, Jeff, age 54, and single, still lives with his parents. that should offer some security, don't ya think ? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, if it is real, I just hope Peckman and Romanek have tight security. (Note: An if, then, statement follows) - If they are real, then there has been a cover-up somewhere. Therefore, let's hope the cover-upers are not low enough to stoop to breaking the 1st Commandment. I hope Peckman and Romanek have taken all measures to protect themselves. (Note: An if, then, statement follows) If it is known that they have, and one of them dies before the public release in a month or two, then we know there is a cover-up and a murder. Period. With the aforementioned, the Black Ops folks are in a bit of a pickle now. OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20016@ wrote: Jeff Peckman, former Washington D.C. TMO 'Senate' (national TMO office) official, lives in Denver and occasionally promotes TMO initiatives there. Jeff is very much in the news today, as the Drudge Report notes, as tomorrow Jeff will present to the international media a close- up video of an alien inside a spaceship. See the article at http://tiny.cc/RrDwr Ignore the error message and look for the Most Viewed section. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: This - FairfieldLife - is one strange place
At least she/he didn't try to lecture us telling us what we were doing wrong! --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And after that, s/he immediately unsubscribed. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TMer Jeff Peckman to show authentic alien video tomorrow
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mainstream20016 Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 10:58 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TMer Jeff Peckman to show authentic alien video tomorrow According to the Rocky Mountain News, Jeff, age 54, and single, still lives with his parents. that should offer some security, don't ya think ? He’s divorced. Used to be one of the full-time couples. His ex-wife lives in FF. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.3/1472 - Release Date: 5/29/2008 7:27 AM
[FairfieldLife] Newsweek article TM in schools
It might have been the teenager stumbling into the school hallway bloodied by six gunshot wounds. Maybe it was the funerals of more than a dozen of his students or the drug dealers competing for his kids. In the mid-'90s, George Rutherford, a devout Baptist who spent 20 years as principal of one of the toughest middle schools in Washington, D.C., Fletcher Johnson, knew he and his 1,500 students had reached a breaking point. That's when I stumbled onto Transcendental Meditation, says Rutherford. I feel it is the greatest savior other than Jesus Christ that I know. Rutherford, his teachers and his students began meditating in the classroom twice a day for 20 minutes. Fights stopped breaking out on the third floor, test scores went up, he recalls. (more) http://www.newsweek.com/id/139206?from=rss
